Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Emily Lake]

Please enlighten us because I don't 'understand where it's coming from' if my understanding that it comes from a place of ignorance and bigotry and hatred is incorrect.

I believe that psychopathy is a mental illness. I think it's a mental defect that should not be normalized. I think psychopaths should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that psychopaths may need to be institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate psychopaths, nor do I think my view on the treatment of psychopaths is motivated by bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I believe that pedophiles are mentally ill. I think that being sexually attracted to prepubescent children is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think pedophiles should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean pedophiles may need to be sterilized or institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate pedophiles, and I don't think that viewing pedophilia as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I think that sexual sadists are mentally ill. I think that being turned on by and achieving sexual gratification from causing other people pain is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think sexual sadists should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that sexual sadists may need to be sterilized or institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate sexual sadists, and I don't think my viewing sexual sadism as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I believe that schizophrenics are mentally ill. I think schizophrenia is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think schizophrenics should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that schizophrenics may need to be institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate schizophrenics, and I don't think my view of schizophrenia as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

Let's stretch this a bit. I believe that people with cross-species identities are mentally ill. I think genuinely believing you're an animal on the inside is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think people with cross-species identities should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean they need to be institutionalized for the safety of themselves and the rest of society.

I don't hate people with cross-species identities, and I don't think my view of cross-species identities as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now. Provisionally accept that Kirk genuinely believes that transgender people are mentally ill and need mental health treatment. You don't have to believe the same thing - I'm only asking that you accept that Kirk genuinely believes it.

If Kirk genuinely believes that transgender people are mentally ill and need mental health treatment... then it's entirely possible that his view and his statements are motivated by compassion for transgender people as well as care for the rest of society.

Again - you don't have to think transgender people are mentally ill in order to accept that Kirk believes it to be true.

If you can provisionally accept that Kirk believes this, then calling him a bigot motivated by hatred accomplishes nothing at all. It's ineffective, and you're fighting the wrong fight. Were he still alive, I would say that the only effective way to alter his approach is to challenge his belief, and change his mind.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You can't deconvert a christian (or any other religious person for that matter) by calling them names and saying they're hateful. The only way you can deconvert them is to successfully convince them that their belief is in error.

 

[TSwizzle]

This past weekend an ex of mine called me. She's been doxxed from posts she made on FB regarding Kirk being a monstrous asshole. Death threats followed, her home address was publicly posted, and she's been put on leave from her job. She's almost certainly going to end up fired. There is no practical legal remedy for her. That made her furious with me, but that's why she's an ex.

Anyway, maybe someone can enlighten me. People are being concretely and measurably harmed for their speech by hundreds of thousands of private citizens on behalf of the government.

Is this a new thing?

No, not at all. You reap what you sow unfortunately.

 

[Emily Lake]

Do we need to find ways to safeguard "women" from predator "women" who use their shared "woman" status as cover to predate?

No, we need to find ways to safeguard female human beings from predatory male human beings who use mimicry and intimidation to claim an unverifiable and completely subjective inner soul of woman as cover to prey on women.

 

[Emily Lake]

At this point the main people I'm worried about are the people who want to start a civil war, and turn the country into a theocracy.

I'm worried about the people who want to start a civil war, regardless of whether they want the country to be a theocracy or not.

 

[Emily Lake]

As is this.

Nearly a third of Americans – 30% – say people may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track, according to the latest PBS News/NPR/Marist poll.

It’s a sharp rise from 18 months ago, when 19% of Americans said the same.

Yeah... bout that... there are a few steps between the 'violence' and nation getting 'back on track'. They aren't pleasant either.

At least it is somewhat a bipartisan thing. Though the Democrat numbers are definitely a cause for alarm.

The belief that violence may be the answer has grown among Republicans and independents – up 3 and 7 percentage points, respectively, since April last year. But the largest increase has been among Democrats. Now 28% of Democrats share that view, up 16 points.

The truth, however, is that the right-wing is happy with Trump telling the military they might be killing Americans soon. So the right-wing is full of crap.

This tendency towards needing violence to fix things... that is about as naive (at best) as it gets. The achievements seen for liberalism in the 50s/60s came about from non-violent protest (where the violence was hurled upon the protestors). All the violent crap, it didn't change a thing. And that goes for the right-wing as well. The assassinations, attacks on African Americans failed to stop the Civil Rights Act from happening.

Well yeah, if you look at the shit that happened after the 40's, sure, those "nonviolent" achievements of liberalism were only possible after the violent overthrow of Nazi ideologies worldwide.

I would say a lot of violent crap was necessary before those protests became possible and let's be clear: even peaceful protest is violence, it's just deferred and "softer" violence.

It's people standing up to violence with a deferred, quiet threat: "there are more of us and it doesn't take even this many to shut it all down".

But yeah... Just ignore the fact that the children of Nazis backed down because those aligned against their parents won, and then executed as many of the survivors of the then-contemporary regime of fascism as was possible.

You come across as being rather bloodthirsty.

 

[crazyfingers]

At this point the main people I'm worried about are the people who want to start a civil war, and turn the country into a theocracy.

I'm worried about the people who want to start a civil war, regardless of whether they want the country to be a theocracy or not.

Well the main booster for civil war, without saying those two words, is Trump. He's fomenting violence and US vs Them as if it was his religion. Listening to Trump, all democrats and anyone who leans democrat are the "enemy within" .

Trump is pushing for civil war with his words and actions. I hope he fails but he could just declare civil war anyway.

 

[Emily Lake]

That's the position we're in though.

They want bloody conflict. They advocate for it publicly and unmistakably through their rhetoric. Even the most uneducated, alcoholic whoremonger has been told they're in God's army. Got Wit Uss. History is replete with bloody examples of what happens when God is on your side.

Democrats have a hand in this too. Seriously, Democrats have spent nearly a decade constantly telling the public that Republicans are fascists - loudly, on TV, over and over again. Their supporters, including several on this site, have spent more than a decade insisting that conservatives and even sometimes independents are nazis, or at least nazi adjacent.

The right is on a bender, but so is the left. And if you don't think that Democrats are partially responsible for the state we find ourselves in, then you are naively and blindly partisan.

 

[Emily Lake]

Violence isn't a magic button

No more than punishment and praise is a magic button. You can't after all just wantonly punish and praise someone randomly and hope the outcom you want.

But much like the situation where you have screws and something to fasten down with them, while neither the screws and the screwdriver are magic, while wiggling them at the problem does nothing, the solution itself still requires application of those tools, and in the proper way.

No change happens, no change is possible, when there is a violent regime and that violent bully is not opposed with every measure of promised violence.

It is not a magic button... But it is definitely a necessary button have on your table, and a necessary tool to be able to use.

Your peace at all costs will lead you to the peace of the grave.

I will not share that peace. Nobody should. So it is the peace of the violent and wild and free, or it is the peace of the grave.

And bear in mind I am not the one threatening you with your peace of the grave, that's the Trumpists.

Respectfully, you sound like you're having a psychotic break, while also advocating for civil war and doing your damndest to incite violence.

It is laughable that you will watch someone who murders others who are powerless and begging for their lives, and think that when YOU ask nicely, YOU will be spared.

What the actual fuck are you even talking about?

 

[Emily Lake]

Who said peace at all costs?

Uh… Emily, for example?

No I fucking didn't. I'm not a pacifist, but I'm very staunchly non-aggressionist.

I did, however, say that ALL OF US have a duty to de-escalate, and a responsibility to avoid inciting violence with hyperbolic and propagandistic rhetoric.

I think anyone who steps up to senseless violence is an enemy of the state

Like Americans who fought in WWII?

There was an enormous amount of sense involved in defending the US against aggressor nations who were systematically taking over other countries. There was nothing senseless about our engagement in WW2.

 

[Kyrion]

This past weekend an ex of mine called me. She's been doxxed from posts she made on FB regarding Kirk being a monstrous asshole. Death threats followed, her home address was publicly posted, and she's been put on leave from her job. She's almost certainly going to end up fired. There is no practical legal remedy for her. That made her furious with me, but that's why she's an ex.

Anyway, maybe someone can enlighten me. People are being concretely and measurably harmed for their speech by hundreds of thousands of private citizens on behalf of the government.

Is this a new thing?

Where have you been? Private citizens have been being doxxed, threatened, and losing their jobs because of mob justice for years now.

The part that you are missing is that speech is only valid when it is being used constructively. Debate and the use of politics is only valid when what you are discussing is valid to debate and politics.

You get to debate how best to allocate funds for a sewage system. You do not get to debate on if humans get to have rights. The people that are only capable of arguing for the latter are only doing so in bad faith to harass and exhaust serious people that do want politics to work as intended to address and fix issues that require a sincere debate on.

People that can only argue for the latter should and are rightfully condemned by society and punished by society. You don't give an arsonist a platform to argue for arson. You boo and shun him and deny him employment and displace him as much as you can out of society.

 

[Emily Lake]

She responds to (freaks out about) my posts. Why does anyone on a message board listen to anyone else? She’s a bright person who honestly shares the feelings she wears in her sleeve AFAIK. Not much more can be asked, really.

I find your style of posting to be incredibly abrasive, and I find that many of your post directed at me are exaggerated and misrepresent my views. But I do appreciate that you engage. I disagree with your extremist views on some topics... but honestly I don't even dislike you.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why are you listening to her?

She responds to (freaks out about) my posts. Why does anyone on a message board listen to anyone else? She’s a bright person who honestly shares the feelings she wears in her sleeve AFAIK. Not much more can be asked, really.

I'm really not so certain about that anymore.

That's rich, seeing that you and I agree on far more than we disagree on.

 

[Emily Lake]

When the options are to tolerate fascism or put down a coup, I would desperately choose civil war to return our constitutional freedoms.

This is quite the point.

If you would rather not have a civil war when Nazis stand in the halls of government to do Nazi things, that makes you a Nazi; it means you prefer Nazis in government.

I don't like the idea of a civil war.

I in fact hate it.

But I hate Nazis more than I hate wars.

You don't call people nazis because they're actually nazis. You call people nazis so that you can justify violence against them and justify imposing your own authoritarian views on heretics who don't adopt your beliefs.

You aren't a Nazi, you're a right wing propaganda machine.

No, I'm not. But don't let reality slow you down any.

They've been spamming that rhetoric of "justifying violence" all week. It's nonsense, of course. Jarhyn would never commit an act of political violence against you, nor would anyone commit a violent act against you because of something Jarhyn wrote, no matter what it is.

Lol, have you actually been reading Jarhyn's posts in this thread? I'm actually pretty sure that if Jarhyn ever met me in person, he would be happy to physically attack me. You probably wouldn't, but be honest here, Poli. Jarhyn is not as stable as he was even a year ago, let alone five.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

That's the position we're in though.

They want bloody conflict. They advocate for it publicly and unmistakably through their rhetoric. Even the most uneducated, alcoholic whoremonger has been told they're in God's army. Got Wit Uss. History is replete with bloody examples of what happens when God is on your side.

Democrats have a hand in this too. Seriously, Democrats have spent nearly a decade constantly telling the public that Republicans are fascists - loudly, on TV, over and over again. Their supporters, including several on this site, have spent more than a decade insisting that conservatives and even sometimes independents are nazis, or at least nazi adjacent.

The right is on a bender, but so is the left. And if you don't think that Democrats are partially responsible for the state we find ourselves in, then you are naively and blindly partisan.

I take it you've never read anything else I've written here.

 

[Toni]

Please enlighten us because I don't 'understand where it's coming from' if my understanding that it comes from a place of ignorance and bigotry and hatred is incorrect.

I believe that psychopathy is a mental illness. I think it's a mental defect that should not be normalized. I think psychopaths should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that psychopaths may need to be institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate psychopaths, nor do I think my view on the treatment of psychopaths is motivated by bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I believe that pedophiles are mentally ill. I think that being sexually attracted to prepubescent children is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think pedophiles should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean pedophiles may need to be sterilized or institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate pedophiles, and I don't think that viewing pedophilia as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I think that sexual sadists are mentally ill. I think that being turned on by and achieving sexual gratification from causing other people pain is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think sexual sadists should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that sexual sadists may need to be sterilized or institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate sexual sadists, and I don't think my viewing sexual sadism as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

I believe that schizophrenics are mentally ill. I think schizophrenia is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think schizophrenics should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean that schizophrenics may need to be institutionalized for the safety of the rest of society.

I don't hate schizophrenics, and I don't think my view of schizophrenia as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

Let's stretch this a bit. I believe that people with cross-species identities are mentally ill. I think genuinely believing you're an animal on the inside is a mental defect and should not be normalized. I think people with cross-species identities should receive mental health care, and in some cases that might mean they need to be institutionalized for the safety of themselves and the rest of society.

I don't hate people with cross-species identities, and I don't think my view of cross-species identities as a mental illness is bigotry. Do you think I'm motivated by hatred and bigotry?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now. Provisionally accept that Kirk genuinely believes that transgender people are mentally ill and need mental health treatment. You don't have to believe the same thing - I'm only asking that you accept that Kirk genuinely believes it.

If Kirk genuinely believes that transgender people are mentally ill and need mental health treatment... then it's entirely possible that his view and his statements are motivated by compassion for transgender people as well as care for the rest of society.

Again - you don't have to think transgender people are mentally ill in order to accept that Kirk believes it to be true.

If you can provisionally accept that Kirk believes this, then calling him a bigot motivated by hatred accomplishes nothing at all. It's ineffective, and you're fighting the wrong fight. Were he still alive, I would say that the only effective way to alter his approach is to challenge his belief, and change his mind.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You can't deconvert a christian (or any other religious person for that matter) by calling them names and saying they're hateful. The only way you can deconvert them is to successfully convince them that their belief is in error.

A lot of people used to believe that people other than white people were less intelligent and less capable of feeling pain.

A lot of people used to believe that girls abd women were less competent than boys and men at pretty much everything. They also believed that girls or women who wanted to get an education or an education beyond very elementary learning were mentally ill. A woman who was not ‘chaste’ or who seemed to enjoy sex was deemed mentally ill. Women were often institutionalized by males in their family if they were inconvenient—you know, wanted to control their bodies or own property or have a sex life.

A lot of people believed that every non straight non cis person was mentally ill.

Some people still believe some or all of those things.

I believe that such people are bigots, no matter how sincerely held their bigoted beliefs.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

What's with the eyerolls? Still not going to admit we know Project 2025 is happening and the impact it will have on marginalized groups?

 

[crazyfingers]

What's with the eyerolls? Still not going to admit we know Project 2025 is happening and the impact it will have on marginalized groups?

Project 2025 is being implemented with gusto by that creep Russell Vought who is the real power behind the stupid evil Trump. There is no way that stupid Trump could think up all of the thousands of his executive orders. Vought is pulling all the strings. And Trump loves it. The destruction of a Nation.

 

[Elixir]

The part that you are missing is that speech is only valid when it is being used constructively. Debate and the use of politics is only valid when what you are discussing is valid to debate and politics.

Trump'll letcha know what's valid or con$tructive and what's not.
We used to have a congress, a supreme court and even a public informed enough to make those judgments. But now we don't.
Good thing we have a fat orange sexual predator to defraud us out of our money before we misspend it!

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

You say Kirk believed transgender people are mentally ill. Believing that transgender people therefore are mentally ill, and therefore should be hospitalized in a mental institution. But that's not hatred!!!

In this thread, we learn that Spacetime Inhabitant believes that institutionalizing paranoid schizophrenics is motivated by hatred. Good job you.

There is a huge difference between institutionalizing the genuinely mentally ill (for example paranoid schizophrenics) and people who are not mentally ill, but that one loud and aggressive group (who are themselves mentally ill) call mentally ill. Do you agree with Charlie Kirk that trans people are mentally ill (and therefore should be hated).

Do we need to find ways to safeguard "women" from predator "women" who use their shared "woman" status as cover to predate?

No, we need to find ways to safeguard female human beings from predatory male human beings who use mimicry and intimidation to claim an unverifiable and completely subjective inner soul of woman as cover to prey on women.

So you believe all transgender people are not genuinely of a different brain/mind nature to their original body, and also that all of them are sexual predators. Sounds like unfounded bias and hatred to me. Why do American neo-conservatives have an obsession with public bathrooms? When sexual assaults do occur there, it is mainly "real" men doing it.

Also moderates mainly call extreme right-wingers fascists. The Nazi label is for when they are even more extreme, or they call themselves that (American Nazi Party).

 

[GenesisNemesis]

"A lot of conservatives are Nazis/fascists/racists? That's an unfair generalization and ridiculous! But anyway, trans people are sexual predators!"